User talk:Yorkshirehistorian1700

Welcome!

Hello, Yorkshirehistorian1700, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Edmund Alderson Sandford Fawcett did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Folkezoft (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Edmund Alderson Sandford Fawcett

Hello Yorkshirehistorian1700,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Edmund Alderson Sandford Fawcett for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:56, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Yorkshirehistorian1700. Thank you for your work on Edmund Alderson Sandford Fawcett. Another editor, SunloungerFrog, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Do you have an exact URL for his obituary in the Times, please?

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunloungerFrog}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can a photograph of the newspaper suffice ? If not will see if I can get the specific link from the Times. Yorkshirehistorian1700 (talk) 17:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An online link, even if behind a paywall, would be useful for future verification. Do you have any other sources with significant coverage of the subject? At the moment it looks like the Times obituary is the only one, which isn't enough to establish notability. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 22:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have attached a photograph of the Times obituary herewitgh and added several additional sources which show the significant coverage. Yorkshirehistorian1700 (talk) 08:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you check carefully that you have not plagiarized (maybe inadvertentently by close paraphrasing) the Times obit please? I haven't the time to undertake the analysis myself at the moment, but some of the phrasing looks very similar. Respecting copyright is taken seriously on enwiki. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 19:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this is satisfactory would you be able to remove the notability issue ? Yorkshirehistorian1700 (talk) 15:55, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I don't have access to the BNA sources, so I can't assess whether they're significant coverage or not. If you are content that they are, then of course you may remove the notability tag yourself. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 19:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]